4 ms·

Why do you think Microsoft is going ahead with "Metro" touch interfaces in Windows 8? How applications are installed and files are managed is a different issue

Why do you think Microsoft is going ahead with "Metro" touch interfaces in Windows 8? How applications are installed and files are managed is a different issue, it's irrelevant to how the user interface operates.

untog 15y ago
Why do you think Microsoft is going ahead with "Metro" touch interfaces in Windows 8? Because a new form factor has emerged. It hasn't killed the old one, though- very few people that use computers (i.e. in an office, sat at a desk) could perform their job on a tablet. Metro sits on top of the existing UI without replacing it, in the same way that tablets complement existing computing setups, not replace them. I don't doubt that tablet usage will increase and that PC usage may decline, but tablets still fill a specific role.
- wavephorm 15y ago
  It's not surprising that most people (even programmers, and the technically inclined) can't even comprehend how the desktop model will be replaced by natural user interfaces. That's precisely why paradigm shifts catch people and entire industries off guard. I guarantee in 10 years you won't be using a mouse, you won't be resizing windowed applications, and moving scrollbars up and down, none of this will be necessary. I'm not just talking about iPad replacing your Windows PC. I'm talking about a mouse not even being necessary to perform your tasks. Why use a mouse to click a button, when you can just touch it with your finger, or why click through 20 context menus to activate an option when you can just speak to your computer and say "turn music on". The operating system and form factor of the device is irrelevant. Natural user interfaces (touch, sound, speech, vision, gestures) are going to blow the desktop model into the dark ages. And it's going to happen way, way faster than most people expect.
  - bad_user 15y ago
    There is no such thing as a "natural user interface". What is natural is learning by reapplying already learned concepts. Stay off the weeds for awhile.
    - wavephorm 15y ago
      No such thing? Really? So you're saying "touch, sound, speech, vision, gestures" for using computers does not exist? You have inadvertently proved my point, few people today can comprehend how computers will be used tomorrow. And it is this exact reason that Linux is going to be light year behind the rest of the world when it comes to user interface design. The people making open source duplications of windows aren't the ones innovating for the future. Anyone who thinks Linux desktop is going to take over the world needs to stay off the weed.
      - untog 15y ago
        No such thing? Really? So you're saying "touch, sound, speech, vision, gestures" for using computers does not exist? No, what he and I are saying is that you're drawing an entirely artificial line in the sand about what is and isn't "natural". Desktop interfaces today use "touch" in the sense that you touch a keyboard and mouse. They use sound. Obviously they use vision. Why is pressing on the screen with my finger more "natural" than using a mouse? What does "natural" even mean and why is it better than "non-natural"? few people today can comprehend how computers will be used tomorrow For a second there I imagined I was in the 1960s, talking to someone who is convinced that everyone will be driving a flying car by 1990. Predicting with absolute certainly how anything is going to look in the future usually doesn't pan out.
        wavephorm 15y ago
        Desktop interfaces today use "touch" in the sense that you touch a keyboard and mouse Touchscreen interfaces, speech recognition and dictation, and computer vision are NOT part of the desktop GUI paradigm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elements_of_graphical_user_interfaces http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elements_of_graphical_user_inte... someone who is convinced that everyone will be driving a flying car by 1990. Predicting with absolute certainly how anything is going to look in the future It is not just me that is convinced that next-generation interfaces will replace conventional desktops. Steve Jobs did too.
      - bad_user 15y ago
  - untog 15y ago
    why click through 20 context menus to activate an option when you can just speak to your computer and say "turn music on". Imagine, for a second, an entire office of people using voice-activated commands. It simply would not work. Why use a mouse to click a button, when you can just touch it with your finger Because that would involve raising my arm and would actually be far more work (and less comfortable) than just using a mouse. OK, we think- let's put the screen where the keyboard is. Now I'm staring downwards for the entire day. And where does my keyboard go? I'm sure as hell not going to dictate this document. I'm not saying that things won't change, but "natural interface" means precisely nothing.
    - wavephorm 15y ago
      "natural interface" means precisely nothing. Like I said, it means using touch, speech, and gestures instead of using these arcane mice and cursor metaphors. The computer mouse only exists because they needed a way to activate the UI controls like scrollbars and cascading menus. Once you eliminate the desktop UI controls, most uses of the mouse aren't necessary. Instead of a mouse, you use your voice, and a tablet/touchscreen device beside your keyboard. Keyboards will probably stay around for a long time. But what I'm specifically saying is the traditional desktop we've been using for the past 25 years is most certainly going to go away.
      - untog 15y ago
        But you still aren't outlining why any of this would be better. Like I said- an office full of people using voice commands on their computer would be a total, utter nightmare. How is it better than using a keyboard and mouse?
        wavephorm 15y ago
        A voice command computer would allow me to walk into my kitchen and say "make me a coffee", whereas the ancient desktop model of computing would require me to log into my Windows desktop and scroll and click through menus to connect and schedule time with my coffee maker. There is an order of magnitude difference in usability between these paradigms, and it doesn't matter how good the Ubuntu Unity Linux desktop is, it won't make tasks like this any bit easier. In every office I have worked in, people are already talking on their phones, I don't see how talking to your computer is any different.
rbanffy 15y ago
I think it's a knee-jerk reaction to the iPad's success. Much like Windows Mobile, the gloss is only skin deep. A desktop is a couple clicks away and is probably what most people will use in the end.

untog 15y ago

Why do you think Microsoft is going ahead with "Metro" touch interfaces in Windows 8? Because a new form factor has emerged. It hasn't killed the old one, though- very few people that use computers (i.e. in an office, sat at a desk) could perform their job on a tablet. Metro sits on top of the existing UI without replacing it, in the same way that tablets complement existing computing setups, not replace them. I don't doubt that tablet usage will increase and that PC usage may decline, but tablets still fill a specific role.

wavephorm 15y ago
It's not surprising that most people (even programmers, and the technically inclined) can't even comprehend how the desktop model will be replaced by natural user interfaces. That's precisely why paradigm shifts catch people and entire industries off guard. I guarantee in 10 years you won't be using a mouse, you won't be resizing windowed applications, and moving scrollbars up and down, none of this will be necessary. I'm not just talking about iPad replacing your Windows PC. I'm talking about a mouse not even being necessary to perform your tasks. Why use a mouse to click a button, when you can just touch it with your finger, or why click through 20 context menus to activate an option when you can just speak to your computer and say "turn music on". The operating system and form factor of the device is irrelevant. Natural user interfaces (touch, sound, speech, vision, gestures) are going to blow the desktop model into the dark ages. And it's going to happen way, way faster than most people expect.
- bad_user 15y ago
  There is no such thing as a "natural user interface". What is natural is learning by reapplying already learned concepts. Stay off the weeds for awhile.
  - wavephorm 15y ago
    No such thing? Really? So you're saying "touch, sound, speech, vision, gestures" for using computers does not exist? You have inadvertently proved my point, few people today can comprehend how computers will be used tomorrow. And it is this exact reason that Linux is going to be light year behind the rest of the world when it comes to user interface design. The people making open source duplications of windows aren't the ones innovating for the future. Anyone who thinks Linux desktop is going to take over the world needs to stay off the weed.
    - untog 15y ago
      No such thing? Really? So you're saying "touch, sound, speech, vision, gestures" for using computers does not exist? No, what he and I are saying is that you're drawing an entirely artificial line in the sand about what is and isn't "natural". Desktop interfaces today use "touch" in the sense that you touch a keyboard and mouse. They use sound. Obviously they use vision. Why is pressing on the screen with my finger more "natural" than using a mouse? What does "natural" even mean and why is it better than "non-natural"? few people today can comprehend how computers will be used tomorrow For a second there I imagined I was in the 1960s, talking to someone who is convinced that everyone will be driving a flying car by 1990. Predicting with absolute certainly how anything is going to look in the future usually doesn't pan out.
      - wavephorm 15y ago
        Desktop interfaces today use "touch" in the sense that you touch a keyboard and mouse Touchscreen interfaces, speech recognition and dictation, and computer vision are NOT part of the desktop GUI paradigm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elements_of_graphical_user_interfaces http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elements_of_graphical_user_inte... someone who is convinced that everyone will be driving a flying car by 1990. Predicting with absolute certainly how anything is going to look in the future It is not just me that is convinced that next-generation interfaces will replace conventional desktops. Steve Jobs did too.
    - bad_user 15y ago
- untog 15y ago
  why click through 20 context menus to activate an option when you can just speak to your computer and say "turn music on". Imagine, for a second, an entire office of people using voice-activated commands. It simply would not work. Why use a mouse to click a button, when you can just touch it with your finger Because that would involve raising my arm and would actually be far more work (and less comfortable) than just using a mouse. OK, we think- let's put the screen where the keyboard is. Now I'm staring downwards for the entire day. And where does my keyboard go? I'm sure as hell not going to dictate this document. I'm not saying that things won't change, but "natural interface" means precisely nothing.
  - wavephorm 15y ago
    "natural interface" means precisely nothing. Like I said, it means using touch, speech, and gestures instead of using these arcane mice and cursor metaphors. The computer mouse only exists because they needed a way to activate the UI controls like scrollbars and cascading menus. Once you eliminate the desktop UI controls, most uses of the mouse aren't necessary. Instead of a mouse, you use your voice, and a tablet/touchscreen device beside your keyboard. Keyboards will probably stay around for a long time. But what I'm specifically saying is the traditional desktop we've been using for the past 25 years is most certainly going to go away.
    - untog 15y ago
      But you still aren't outlining why any of this would be better. Like I said- an office full of people using voice commands on their computer would be a total, utter nightmare. How is it better than using a keyboard and mouse?
      - wavephorm 15y ago
        A voice command computer would allow me to walk into my kitchen and say "make me a coffee", whereas the ancient desktop model of computing would require me to log into my Windows desktop and scroll and click through menus to connect and schedule time with my coffee maker. There is an order of magnitude difference in usability between these paradigms, and it doesn't matter how good the Ubuntu Unity Linux desktop is, it won't make tasks like this any bit easier. In every office I have worked in, people are already talking on their phones, I don't see how talking to your computer is any different.

rbanffy 15y ago

I think it's a knee-jerk reaction to the iPad's success. Much like Windows Mobile, the gloss is only skin deep. A desktop is a couple clicks away and is probably what most people will use in the end.